So, the conference has now officially kicked off and we've had some awesome speakers talking about a variety of policy-related issues around diversity, equality and inclusion.

First off, Dr Sally Hines gave us a quick overview of the research project that she and Dr Zowie Davy have been working on. The project entitled 'Gender Diversity, Recognition and Citizenship' looked at how trans* people understand and experience the Gender Recognition Act and the wider policy landscape in the UK. Key recommendations included removing the 'divorce clause' that requires transgender people to divorce their existing partners post-transition; as well as recognition for non-gendered and multi-gendered people.

Fantastic stuff!

Other highlights from this morning include the talk given by James Morton (Scottish Transgender Alliance) around UK trans equality legislation - and in particular, the 'steps forward' and 'steps backward' that we have seen in recent years. We also heard from Tamsila Tauquir who told us all about the great work that is currently being undertaken over at the Safra Project. In the second panel of the morning, Yvette Taylor from the London Southbank University presented a fascinating paper, posing prominent questions such as 'who or what is being missed out in diversity indexing and 'box-ticking'?' and 'who has to carry the 'burden' of diversity?'

It's on this note that I'd like to ask a few more questions relating to this morning's panels..

Firstly: How can we make sure that queer movements do not themselves embody the exclusivity they are trying to critique? So, for example, how do we move away from this idea that a person must prove that they are 'gay enough' or 'trans enough' to be valid participants in queer politics?

And leading on from this, a question that was brought up on Twitter via Yvette Taylor's talk: Who is (and who should be?) responsible for recognising diversity within society, but also within queer movements themselves?

It sounds a but strange but maybe "diversity" is ultimately a concept to try and get away from. Maybe recognising diversity means using an image you have of someone else to reassure yourself; identity in that sense being fixed by comparison to someone else. If people instead changed the terms of the question, looking at the ways their own identity doesn't cohere rather than the ways it does, then the whole debate changes.